As Twitchy told you earlier, CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin concluded that Donald Trump is guilty of collusion because he’s been frustrated by the investigation:
Happy people don't obstruct justice. Trump's frustration at leaks and investigation are evidence of guilt, not innocence. But let's see the report . .
— Jeffrey Toobin (@JeffreyToobin) April 18, 2019
In a similar vein, MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace seems to think that the fact that the Mueller probe took nearly two years is also evidence that Trump’s guilty of something:
.@NicolleDWallace: "We know it wasn't a criminal conspiracy with the Russians, but then what was it? Because Robert Mueller spent 22 months looking at it, and if there was nothing, I'm pretty sure it wouldn't have taken 22 months to say nothing." pic.twitter.com/UfP9CzDuhN
— David Rutz (@DavidRutz) April 18, 2019
Oh, honey …
Girl. https://t.co/95W2URfup7
— Chad Felix Greene (@chadfelixg) April 18, 2019
Ha ha ha, beautiful
— Some guy tweeted something ??♂️ (@jtLOL) April 18, 2019
Reminder: Nicolle Wallace gets paid to discuss serious issues seriously.
The duration of the investigation proves the guilt of the target of the investigation.
— Razor (@hale_razor) April 18, 2019
So that's the new standard? If there's a lengthy investigation, it must mean the target of the investigation is guilty?
— Fake Noose (@LetItBurnUSA) April 18, 2019
“The fact there was an investigation proves he was guilty.”
Sure. Go with that.
— The Truth Hurts (@FactSmacker) April 18, 2019
Yeah … that’s not how this works. That’s not how any of this works.
?????? pic.twitter.com/tLvVJUACGc
— MotorCityHawk (@MotorCitiHawk) April 18, 2019
— Patsy Jones (@pjones59) April 18, 2019
Shorter @NicolleDWallace pic.twitter.com/1U2YrPoVXj
— Richard Patriarchy (@DickPatriarchy) April 18, 2019
She's….. she's not smart
— Habitual Linestepper (@FergusFSU) April 18, 2019
Ummmmm pic.twitter.com/dATqJSEkiI
— Just Séan (@Seannybucket) April 18, 2019
This is one bad take
— Cartoon Bob (@CBobEmperor) April 18, 2019
Everyone drop your pencils. We have found the dumbest take. https://t.co/VjWDN2hb4X
— Mo Mo (@molratty) April 18, 2019
It’s no Judd Legum “innocent people don’t need memes” take, but it’s still quite impressive in its stupidity. And possibly very useful:
Isn't this one of the lines you're supposed to say to get out of jury duty?
— Captain Tenneal ????? (@TLarsen2) April 18, 2019
We’ll definitely have to try that next time.